Click on Julian Assange - Absent Justice to discover why our typical Home Page introduction about Julian Assange has been moved to this dedicated webpage.
Before the late 1990s, the Australian government-owned Australia's telephone network and the communications carrier, Telecom, which was now privatized and called Telstra. Telecom monopolised communications, allowing the network to deteriorate into disrepair. When four small business owners experienced severe communication problems, they sought government-endorsed arbitration, understanding that the government would provide the necessary documents. However, neither the government nor Telstra provided the required documents. The arbitrations were not conducted ethically: the appointed arbitrator allowed Telstra to minimize the claims and losses of the members and failed to address serious crimes committed by Telstra before the arbitrations, including threats that were made and carried out against me during my arbitration (Senate Evidence File No 31) were not documented in the arbitrator's findings, as required by the Arbitration Agreement.
Criminal Conduct
Telstra is run by 'thugs in suits'
Telstra threats carried out.
Page 180 ERC&A, from the official Australian Senate Hansard dated November 29, 1994, details Senator Ron Boswell's inquiry to Telstra's legal directorate regarding withholding my 'Freedom of Information' documents during arbitration. This issue arose from my assistance to the AFP in their investigations into Telstra's interception of my telephone conversations and related faxes. Notably, forty-three arbitration-related claim documents faxed to the arbitrator never arrived, as indicated in his arbitration document schedule. This alarming event, which has not undergone a transparent investigation as of June 1994, demands attention.
“Why did Telecom advise the Commonwealth Ombudsman that Telecom withheld FOI documents from Alan Smith because Alan Smith provided Telecom FOI documents to the Australian Federal Police during their investigation?”
After receiving a hollow response from Telstra, which the senator, the AFP and I all knew was utterly false, the senator states:
“…Why would Telecom withhold vital documents from the AFP? Also, why would Telecom penalise COT members for providing documents to the AFP which substantiate that Telecom had conducted unauthorised interceptions of COT members’ communications and subsequently dealt in the intercepted information by providing that information to Telecom’s external legal advisers and others?” Senate Evidence File No 31)
It is possible that when I received threats not to disclose any documents to the Australian Federal Police, the Telstra two 'Thugs in Suits' might have been referring to documents inadvertently released under the Freedom of Information (FOI) showing Senator Bob Collins' was involved in paedophile activities. If this is the case, why were Telstra officials concerned if I released any paedophile documentation to the AFP?
Shouldn't Telstra have wanted me to expose this terrible crime unless, of course, some of their own members were known to be involved in a paedophile ring?
AUSTEL, the former government communications authority (now known as ACMA), issued a letter to Telstra addressing these concerns and the potential interception of telephone conversations for the four main COT Cases individuals - Ann Garms, Maureen Gillan, Graham Schorer, and myself. This communication covers the period during which we established the COT Cases group and when we brought these issues to the attention of AUSTEL. On 10 February 1994 AUSTEL wrote to Telstra's Steve Black, who was Telstra's principal Fast Track Settlement Proposal (FTSP defence officer), stating:
“Yesterday we were called upon by officers of the Australian Federal Police in relation to the taping of the telephone services of COT Cases.
“Given the investigation now being conducted by that agency and the responsibilities imposed on AUSTEL by section 47 of the Telecommunications Act 1991, the nine tapes previously supplied by Telecom to AUSTEL were made available for the attention of the Commissioner of Police.” (See Illegal Interception File No/3)
Here is evidence that AUSTEL (now ACMA) clearly favoured Telstra by exclusively dealing with Telstra on these nine audio tape matters while neglecting the four COT Cases, the actual victims of Telstra's unauthorized interception of their telephone services.
After receiving only a copy of AUSTEL's letter dated February 10, 1994, addressed to Telstra's Steve Black, and not a copy of the actual nine audios of Telstra's tape recordings of their unauthorized interception of our telephone conversations, we promptly brought this critical issue to the attention of Senators Ron Boswell and Richard Alston. Two legal experts confirmed that, as the COT Cases were in a signed government-endorsed process executed by Telstra on November 18, 1993, and the four COT Cases on November 23, 1993, we were legally entitled to these nine tapes. Senator Richard Alston, a former barrister, concurred with this assessment.
We stressed the importance of these nine tapes as conclusive evidence for our Fast Track Settlement Proposals/Arbitration with Telstra. They were the crucial 'nine smoking guns' that would undoubtedly strengthen our claims against Telstra. Consequently, Senator Richard Alston committed to initiating inquiries directed at Telstra on February 15, 1994, to address this troubling matter (Main Evidence File No/29 QUESTIONS ON NOTICE):
- Could you guarantee that no Parliamentarians who have had dealings with ‘COT’ members have had their phone conversations bugged or taped by Telstra?
- Who authorised this taping of ‘COT’ members’ phone conversations and how many and which Telstra employees were involved in either making the voice recordings, transcribing the recordings or analysing the tapes?
- On what basis is Telstra denying copies of tapes to those customers which it has admitted to taping?
- (A) How many customers has Telstra recorded as having had their phone conversations taped without knowledge or consent since 1990? (B) Of these, how many were customers who had compensation claims, including ex Telecom employees, against Telecom?
- Why did Telecom breach its own privacy guide-lines and how will it ensure that the revised guidelines will not be open to similar breaches or abuses?
- Could you explain why a large amount of documents accessed by customers under FOI have a large amount of information deleted, including the names of Telecom employees who wrote and received memos and documents?
- How many customers who have alleged that Telecom has tapped or bugged their phones without their consent or knowledge are the Australian Federal Police currently investigating?
The nine tapes (the nine smoking guns) mentioned were never released to the four COT Cases, despite FOI requests to all involved parties. The arbitrator made no finding regarding Telstra's unlawful conduct in intercepting my telephone conversations and arbitration-related faxes, even though it was clearly defined in my Letter of Claim that these privacy issues were part of that claim.
In early 2000, Frank Blount, Telstra's CEO, discussed the problems Telstra had with its 008/1800 billing problems on pages 132 and 133 of his publication Managing in Australia File 122-i - CAV Exhibit 92 to 127, the author exposes the problems Telstra were hiding from their 1800 customers:
“Blount was shocked, but his anxiety level continued to rise when he discovered this wasn’t an isolated problem."
"The picture that emerged made it crystal clear that performance was sub-standard.”
Frank Blount's Managing Australia https://www.qbd.com.au › managing-in-australia › fran can still be purchased online.
To what extent is the Australian government endorsing Telstra's ongoing refusal to recognize the dismissal of its arbitration billing issues as unwarranted? This persists despite the informed understanding of Telstra's arbitration defence and the entire Telstra board and CEO's comprehensive awareness of the systematic billing discrepancy within its network software, as verified in Frank Blount's co-authored publication.
Where was the justice for the COT Cases and Australia's citizens
I still await the AFP's assistance.
Question 81 in the following AFP transcripts Australian Federal Police Investigation File No/1 confirms that the AFP told me that the government communications authority representative AUSTEL's John MacMahon had supplied the AFP evidence my phones had been bugged over an extended period. Why did the arbitrator not award me in his official findings concerning this evidence after he was supplied with these AFP transcripts?
"... does identify the fact that, that you were live monitored for a period of time. See we're quite satisfied that, there are other references to it".
The fax imprint across the top of this letter is the same as the one described in the Scandrett & Associates fax interception report (Open Letter File No/12 and File No/13), which confirms that two highly skilled telecommunications forensic experts agree that a secondary fax machine was intercepting (screening) the COT Cases faxes during their arbitrations.
One of the two technical consultants attesting to the validity of this 7 January 1999 fax interception report emailed me on 17 December 2014, stating:
“I still stand by my statutory declaration that I was able to identify that the incoming faxes provided to me for review had at some stage been received by a secondary fax machine and then retransmitted, this was done by identifying the dual time stamps on the faxes provided.” (Front Page Part One File No/14)
I received some redacted documents twenty or so years after my arbitration, which is outside the statute of limitations for me to appeal. You can easily view these documents by clicking on the image below with your mouse/cursor.
Given the extensive amount of information I need to have on record in case any of my mini-stories are challenged by authorities who claim our Casualties of Telstra stories are not of public interest or that it is not in Australia's interest to have these matters disclosed online (Refer to Evidence Files), it was also important for me to find a parallel event in a Western nation that claims to be governed by the rule of law. An example of this is the ongoing British Post Office scandal. In this case, the Post Office board and CEO were willing to ruin the lives of hundreds of UK citizens who were Post Office subcontractors operating under the license of a Post Office in various locations around the United Kingdom. The involvement of Alan Bates and his Post Office subcontractors in uncovering several unlawful practices by the British Post Office has turned into a national scandal.
After almost two decades, the British public and several British politicians have been saying that this matter is of public interest and should not be concealed (hidden) by the government. It is essential for England's interest that this matter be thoroughly investigated. Click here to watch the Australian television Channel 7 trailer for ‘Mr Bates vs the Post Office’, which went to air in Australia in February 2024. The British Post Office public servants knew that the Fujitsu Horizon computer software was responsible for the incorrect billing accounting system, as evidenced in this YouTube link: https://youtu.be/MyhjuR5g1Mc.
The Australian government hid the Ericsson AXE telephone exchange equipment issues, which caused widespread software billing problems across Australia for several years. This impacted up to 120,000 COT Type Telstra customers. The Ericsson AXE billing problem and the ‘1800 Free-call’ service billing software issue in Telstra's telephone exchanges are of public concern. Similar issues with the British Post Office Horizon software resulted in the loss of lives due to the stress of operating a business with known systemic equipment issues supplied by the government in both countries.
You will be able to learn more about this story from either my blog at Documentary Alan-Bates vs Post Office, or on line.
At 80 years of age, I miss the noise of the children
I am dedicated to preserving the positive recollections I acquired at my Cape Bridgewater holiday camp. It is disconcerting that, during the government-sanctioned arbitration, nine Telstra employees were predisposed to provide false testimony, resulting in the arbitrator dismissing the ongoing telephone issues at my holiday camp despite my contrary assertions. The meticulous documentation of these deceptive declarations can be accessed on absentjustice.com.
The sexual abuse and the raping of Australian citizens in Parliament House Canberra during the 1990s is still very much in the public eye in 2024 as the following Kangaroo Court website https://shorturl.at/dtDH9, https://shorturl.at/svwI5 and https://shorturl.at/hqzHO shows.
Therefore, it is crucial to highlight the four letters dated 17 August 2017, 6 October 2017, 9 October 2017, and 10 October 2017, authored by COT Case Ann Garms shortly before her passing. These letters were addressed to The Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MP, Prime Minister of Australia, and Senator the Hon. Mathias Cormann (See File Ann Garms 104 Document).
On 1 June 2021, Mathias Cormann assumed office as the Secretary-General of the OECD in Paris, France. Similarly to Australia's former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, he is well-informed about the legitimacy of the COT Cases claims. Nevertheless, our claims have yet to be thoroughly and transparently investigated. These letters are documented under reference See File Ann Garms 104 Document, where she exposes the raping of the first nation (aboriginal children) by Senator Collins in his parliament house Canberra office (rb.gy/dsvidd).
Access to crucial Freedom of Information (FOI) documents stored in Senator Bob Collins' offices, which included information related to Australia-wide Ericsson software issues, was denied to the COT Cases. This denial of access may have been motivated by concerns about inadvertently exposing evidence of the Senator's criminal activities during one of several FOI requests. It is essential to note that the Australian Federal Police (AFP) was concurrently investigating Senator Collins for criminal conduct (child rape) while also probing Telstra for intercepting telephone conversations and COT arbitration-related faxes, some of which were intercepted to and from Parliament House. The potential dissemination of this sensitive material to the media could have given rise to significant issues. Consequently, the COT Cases arbitrations suffered through no fault of their own.
Ericsson AXE faulty telephone exchange equipment (1)
I think it's essential to digress here and go back to 3 June 1993. Two Telstra technical consultants inadvertently left a briefcase in my office. I found that Aladdin had left behind his treasures: the Ericsson Briefcase Saga was about to unfold. Telstra had knowingly misled and deceived me during my first settlement on 11 December 1992 (See Front Page Part Two 2-B).
The briefcase was not locked, and I opened it to find out it belonged to Mr Macintosh. There was no phone number, so I had to wait for business hours the next day to track him down. But what there was in the briefcase was a file titled 'SMITH, CAPE BRIDGEWATER' - AXE - problems ongoing - this has been a significant AXE problem. After five gruelling years fighting the evasive monolith of Telstra, being told various lies along the way, here was possibly the truth from an inside perspective.
The first thing that rang bells was a document which revealed Telstra knew that the Ericsson AXE RVA fault they recorded in March 1992 had lasted for at least eight months — not the three weeks that was the basis of their settlement pay-out. Dated 24/7/92, and with my phone number in the top right corner, the document referred to my complaint that people ringing my number over 8 months received a 'service disconnected' message telling the caller my line was disconnected. The final sentence reads: 'Network investigation should have been brought in as fault has gone on for 8 months'.
I managed to copy about one-third of the briefcase before my copying fax line jammed as it always did after sending more than five or six pages. Telstra retrieved the briefcase the next day, but not before I had sent the other copied information by Australia Post to AUSTEL, the government communications regulator. This act felt like signing my own death warrant. If I had retained these copies and refrained from copying the information, I am confident that I would have won my arbitration and settled by 1993 or early 1994. This would have spared me the thirty-year pursuit of evidence that AUSTEL and Telstra were on the verge of destroying once the COT case arbitrations had commenced. AUSTEL, representing the government, believed that retaining these documents would enable access under FOI or through the arbitration discovery process.
One-third of the documents that I managed to copy contained enough information to convince AUSTEL that Ericsson and Telstra were fully aware that the AXE Ericsson lock-up software problems and faults were a problem worldwide, affecting 15 to 50 per cent of all calls generated through this AXE exchange equipment. The fault locked up the system and affected the billing software.
Thousands upon thousands of Telstra customers Australia-wide had been wrongly billed since the installation of this Ericsson AXE equipment, which, in my case, had been installed in August 1991, with the problems still apparent in 2002. Other countries worldwide were removing or had removed it from their exchanges (see File 10-B Evidence File No/10-A to 10-f ), and Australia was still denying to the arbitrator there was ever a problem with that equipment. Lies were told by Telstra to minimise their liability for the COT Cases. (See Files 6 to 9 AXE Evidence File 1 to 9)
Was this why the Australian government allowed Ericsson to purchase Lane during the government-endorsed COT arbitration while the arbitrations were still in progress?
When the COT arbitration documents were submitted into arbitration, it proved that this Ericsson AXE lock-up call loss rate was between 15% and 50%, as File 10-B Evidence File No/10-A to 10-f clearly shows. AUSTEL then instigated an investigation into these AXE exchange faults and uncovered some 120,000 COT-type complaints were being experienced around Australia. Exhibit (Introduction File No/8-A to 8-C) shows AUSTEL's Chairman Robin Davey received a letter from Telstra's Group General Manager (who was also Telstra's main arbitration defence liaison officer), suggesting he alter that finding of 120,000 COT-type complaints to show a hundred. When the public AUSTEL COT Cases report was launched on 13 April 1994, it stated AUSTEL located up-wards of 50 or more COT-type complaints being experienced around Australia.
In my case, none of the relevant arbitration claims raised against Ericsson, whose official arbitration records numbered A56132, were investigated, including Telstra's Falsified SVT Report. Why did Lane ignore this evidence against Ericsson?
Even worse, when my arbitration claim documents were returned to me after the arbitration concluded, none of my Ericsson technical data was amongst the returned material.
The Australian government should answer the following questions: How long was Lane Telecommunications Pty Ltd in contact with Ericsson, Telstra's major telecommunication equipment supplier, before Ericsson purchased Lanes? Is there a link between Lanes ignoring my Ericsson AXE claim documents and Ericsson's purchase of Lane during the COT arbitration process?
Legal abuse in arbitration and the exposure of crime and corruption within those arbitrations have been costly. Those who controlled the arbitrations committed heinous, scandalous, vile, and mischievous crimes. Absent Justice.com is about exposing this corruption.
TIO Evidence File No 3-A is an internal Telstra email (FOI folio A05993) dated 10 November 1993 from Chris Vonwiller to Telstra’s corporate secretary Jim Holmes, CEO Frank Blount, group general manager of commercial Ian Campbell and other important members of the then-government owned corporation. The subject is Warwick Smith – COT cases, and it is marked as CONFIDENTIAL:
“Warwick Smith contacted me in confidence to brief me on discussions he has had in the last two days with a senior member of the parliamentary National Party in relation to Senator Boswell’s call for a Senate Inquiry into COT Cases.
“Advice from Warwick is:
Boswell has not yet taken the trouble to raise the COT Cases issue in the Party Room.
Any proposal to call for a Senate inquiry would require, firstly, endorsement in the Party Room and, secondly, approval by the Shadow Cabinet. …
The intermediary will raise the matter with Boswell, and suggest that Boswell discuss the issue with Warwick. The TIO sees no merit in a Senate Inquiry.“He has undertaken to keep me informed, and confirmed his view that Senator Alston will not be pressing a Senate Inquiry, at least until after the AUSTEL report is tabled.
“Could you please protect this information as confidential.”
Exhibit TIO Evidence File No 3-A It is highly likely the advice the TIO gave to Telstra’s senior executive, in confidence (that Senator Ron Boswell’s National Party Room was not keen on holding a Senate enquiry) later prompted Telstra to have the "Fast Track Settlement Prosal" FTSP non-legalistic commercial assessment process turned into Telstra’s preferred legalistic arbitration procedure because they now had inside government privileged information. There was no longer a major threat of a Senate enquiry.
We faced a challenging situation when Telstra, Warwick Smith, and Dr Gordon Hughes (the FTSP-Assessor) insisted on transforming our assessment process into a legalistic arbitration process despite the lack of a confidentiality clause. Their demand put us in a difficult position, as they threatened to withdraw from the FTSP if we didn't comply. Additionally, our efforts to seek legal support faced roadblocks, as no firm in Melbourne was willing to take on our case due to their commercial ties with Telstra. Ultimately, we felt compelled to agree to arbitration reluctantly.
This change would generate millions of dollars for Telstra's lawyers who had drafted the agreement (according to a Senate statement, it cost 23 million dollars). Warwick Smith, who later became a politician, was providing assistance to the defendants in the forthcoming arbitrations, allowing Telstra and the assessor, Dr Gordon Hughes, to convert the assessment process into a lengthy arbitration. Ultimately, this led to the bankruptcy of three of the four COT Cases.
On 21 November 2012, Graham Schorer (COT spokesperson) produced a letter of understanding (567 file GS-CAV 522 to 580) that included:
“During the period that I retained Landers & Rogers, at no stage was I informed by Gordon Hughes or any other member of Landers & Rogers staff, that Telecom or the Australian Government Solicitor contacted them with information regarding the North Melbourne exchange.
“Furthermore, had I known that Gordon Hughes had concealed knowledge of such an important document from me, I would not have accepted his appointment as the arbitrator in my arbitration process” (refer 567 file GS-CAV 522 to 580 ).
The included Australian Government Solicitor (AGS) letter is crucial because when Dr. Gordon Hughes was appointed as the official arbitrator to the COT arbitrations, he failed to disclose his conflict of interest regarding Graham Schorer, who was a client of Dr. Hughes in a Federal Court action against Telstra. The same Telstra issues raised in that court case were assessed again in Mr Schorer's arbitration three years later. Dr Hughes granted Mr Schorer more than three years longer than he allowed me to submit my arbitration claim when Mr Schorer re-utilized Telstra's drafted arbitration agreement used in the first four arbitrations, including mine.
The AGS letter and the previous Federal Court action were utilized to demonstrate Dr Gordon Hughes's unethical behaviour in not granting me the extra time he stated was needed in the Telstra-drafted agreement that had been overlooked (refer to Dr Hughes' letter advising that the agreement he had just utilized in my arbitration was not credible - Open Letter File No 55-A).
On March 11, 1999, after Dr Gordon Hughes and Warwick Smith utilized heavy-handed tactics to handle the COT Cases, their arbitrations were concluded, with less than 11 per cent of the claims being met. Senator Kim Carr strongly criticized the handling of the COT arbitrations on the same date, as evidenced in the following Hansard link.
Addressing the government’s lack of power, he said:
“What I do make a comment on is the question of civil liberties and the rights of citizens to approach this parliament and seek redress for their grievances when corporate power, particularly in a publicly owned corporation, has been abused. And there can be no question that that is what is at the heart of this issue.”
And when addressing Telstra’s conduct, he stated:
“But we also know, in the way in which telephone lines were tapped, in the way in which there have been various abuses of this parliament by Telstra—and misleading and deceptive conduct to this parliament itself, similar to the way they have treated citizens—that there has of course been quite a deliberate campaign within Telstra management to undermine attempts to resolve this question in a reasonable way. We have now seen $24 million of moneys being used to crush these people. It has gone on long enough, and simply we cannot allow it to continue. The attempt made last year, in terms of the annual report, when Telstra erroneously suggested that these matters—the CoT cases—had been settled demonstrates that this process of deceptive conduct has continued for far too long.” (See parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/displaychamberhansards1999-03-11)
Legal Professional Privilege
The Firm - John Grisham
It was while all this skulduggery and deception was taking place, and Denise McBurnie, along with Freehill Hollingdale & Page, had drained me of all my reserved energies to keep going, that I remembered the ruthless legal firm portrayed in John Grisham's 1991 novel The Firm.
Learn about government corruption and the 'dirty deeds' used by the government to cover up these horrendous injustices committed against 16 Australian citizens.
Both Telstra’s 14 April 1994 letter to the Australian Federal Police (AFP), which admits at least one Telstra employee was intercepting my telephone conversations and my 9 September 1994 response concerning this unauthorised interception over an extended period, are now stamped “Protected AFP” material. The SENATE official Hansard clearly refers to Telstra’s conduct, stand-over tactics and threats against the COT cases. The Senate Hansard, AFP transcripts (of conversations with me concerning these threats) and the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s records all confirm Telstra carried out those threats against me. Yet, neither the arbitrator nor the TIO addressed this during my arbitration. Why has no one ever addressed this unethical conduct publicly? Why is there no record in the arbitrator’s award exposing these threats? Why was Telstra allowed to make these threats and commit similar unlawful acts against the COT cases during their arbitrations? Neither the TIO nor the arbitrator came to my aid or asked why a corporation could take control over arbitrations in a government-endorsed process.
Although the Freehill Hollingdale & Page - COT Case Strategy has been raised elsewhere on this website, it was again important to raise it right through my story because having to register phone complaints to a lawyer in writing brought on not just PSD; it stopped me focussing on what telephone calls did make it through the minefield of a very congested telephone network.
During this turbulent period where it felt like I was in a dream telephoning a lawyer to explain the previous four incoming calls had just dropped out, I felt as though Denise McBurnie was playing cat a cat-and-mouse-type game with my mind. From the following pages, 36 to 39 Senate - Parliament of Australia Freehill Hollingdale & Page had us COT Cases at their mercy. Worse, however, the day before the Senate committee uncovered this "COT Case Strategy",
On 9 December 1993, The Hon David Hawker MP, my local federal member of Parliament, wrote to congratulate me for:
“your persistence to bring about improvements to Telecom’s country services. I regret that it was at such a high personal cost.” (File 837 - AS-CAV Exhibit 819 to 843)
This was very affirming, as was another letter dated 9 December 1993 from the Hon David Beddall MP, Minister for Communications, in the Labor Government, to Senator Michael Baume, Senator for New South Whales, which said:
“Let me say that the Government is most concerned at allegations that Telecom has not been maintaining telecommunications service quality at appropriate levels. I accept that in a number of cases, including Mr Smith’s there has been great personal and financial distress This is of great concern to me and a full investigation of the facts is clearly warranted.” (Arbitrator File No/82)
Between April 1990 and when I sold the holiday camp in December 2001, I continued to sponsor underprivileged groups to stay there during the weeks partly (that became years) when the phone problems continued to beset the holiday camp. At least some money was coming into the business. Those wanting a cheap holiday persisted by telephoning repetitively regardless of being told the camp was no longer connected to Telstra's network. These groups wanted a holiday, and if they had to drive for hours to make a booking as Loreto College did (see below), then a drive they did.
Sister Maureen Burke drove the three-hour drive to confirm the booking.
Forty-five smiling children - nothing like it in the whole world
The holiday Camp could sleep around 90 to 100 persons in fourteen cabins. I arranged sponsored food purchases through the generosity of several commercial food outlets, and these groups then just used the camp facilities — it didn’t cost me anything other than a small amount of electricity and gas. Around May 1992, I organised a charity week for kids from Ballarat and the South West, including Warrnambool, Hamilton and Portland. This group was organised by Sister Maureen Burke IBVM, the Principal of Loreto College in Ballarat, and I am sure she would not be offended to know that I think of her as the ‘mother’ of the project.
Arrangements regarding food, transport, and any special needs the children might have had to be handled over the phone, and of course, Sister Burke had enormous problems making phone contact; calls were either ringing out, or she was getting a deadline or a message that the number she was ringing was not connected to the Telstra network. Sister Burke knew otherwise. On two occasions in 1992, after trying in vain all through one week, she drove the 3½ hours to make the final arrangements for those camps.
Just as she arrived at the Camp, Karen took a phone call from a very angry man who wanted information about a singles weekend we were trying to set up. This caller was quite abusive. He couldn't understand why we were advertising a business but never answered the phone. Karen burst into tears. She had reached the end of her tolerance, and nothing I could say was any help. When Sister Burke appeared in the office, I decided absence was the better part of valour and removed myself, leaving the two women together. Much later, Sister Burke came out and told me she thought it probably best for both of us if Karen were to leave Cape Bridgewater. I felt numb. It was all happening again.
But it wasn't the same as it had been with Faye. Karen and I sat and talked. True, we would separate, but I assured her she would lose nothing because of her generosity and that I would do whatever was necessary to buy her out. We were both relieved at that. Karen rented a house in Portland, and we remained good friends, though, without her day-to-day assistance at the Camp, which had given me space to travel around, I had to drop my promotional tours.
Twelve months later, in March of 1993, Sister Karen Donnellon, also from Loreto College, tried to make contact via the Portland Ericsson telephone exchange to arrange an annual camp. Sister Donnellon later wrote:
“During a one week period in March of this year I attempted to contact Mr Alan Smith at Bridgewater Camp. In that time I tried many times to phone through.
Each time I dialled I was met with a line that was blank. Even after several re-dials there was no response. I then began to vary the times of calling but it made no difference.” File 231-B → AS-CAV Exhibit 181 to 233
Some years later, I sent Sister Burke an early draft of my manuscript, Absent Justice My Story‘, concerning my valiant attempt to run a telephone-dependent business without a dependent phone service. Sister Burke wrote back,
“Only I know from personal experience that your story is true, otherwise I would find it difficult to believe. I was amazed and impressed with the thorough, detailed work you have done in your efforts to find justice” File 231-A → AS-CAV Exhibit 181 to 233
Of course, Sister Maureen Burke and Sister Karen Donnellon persisted with their continuing battle to find a way to get a proper telephone connection for the holiday camp, partly because it was a low-cost holiday for all concerned but also because these wonderful women were well aware that my business was continuing to exist, albeit ‘by the skin of its teeth, even though Telstra’s automated voice messages kept on telling prospective customers that the business did not exist or, alternatively the callers simply reached a dreaded silence that appeared to indicate that the number they had called was attached to a ‘dead’ line. Either way, I lost the business that may have followed if only the callers could have successfully connected to my office via this dreaded Ericsson AXE telephone exchange.
AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings, dated March 1994, confirms that between Points 2 to 212, the government communication authority AUSTEL (now ACMA) investigated my ongoing telephone problems concerning my belief that hundreds if not possibly thousands of residents in Ballarat Victoria had problems like Loreto College in tying to telephone my business. It is clear from AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings that AUSTEL/ACMA found my claims were valid concerning Ballarat as the following point 115 notes:
“Some problems with incorrectly coded data seem to have existed for a considerable period of time. In July 1993 Mr Smith reported a problem with payphones dropping out on answer to calls made utilising his 008 number. Telecom diagnosed the problem as being to “Due to incorrect data in AXE 1004, CC-1. Fault repaired by Ballarat OSC 8/7/93, The original deadline for the data to be changed was June 14th 1991. Mr Smith’s complaint led to the identification of a problem which had existed for two years.”
The document unequivocally demonstrates that systemic Ericsson AXE billing faults were present as early as July 1992. After reviewing additional Ericsson AXE documents, it becomes increasingly clear that the billing problems were deeply rooted within Telstra's systems, at least by October 1997.
Ericsson AXE faulty telephone exchange equipment (2)
“Our local technicians believe that Mr Smith is correct in raising complaints about incoming callers to his number receiving a Recorded Voice Announcement saying that the number is disconnected.
“They believe that it is a problem that is occurring in increasing numbers as more and more customers are connected to AXE.” False Witness Statement File No 3-A
To further support my claims that Telstra already knew how severe my Ericsson Portland AXE telephone faults were, this can best be viewed by reading Folios C04006, C04007 and C04008, headed TELECOM SECRET Front Page Part Two 2-B, which states:
“Legal position – Mr Smith’s service problems were network related and spanned a period of 3-4 years. Hence Telecom’s position of legal liability was covered by a number of different acts and regulations. … In my opinion Alan Smith’s case was not a good one to test Section 8 for any previous immunities – given his evidence and claims. I do not believe it would be in Telecom’s interest to have this case go to court.
“Overall, Mr Smith’s telephone service had suffered from a poor grade of network performance over a period of several years; with some difficulty to detect exchange problems in the last 8 months.”
It's clear that any reasonable person, given access to AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings, and knowing that my social club bookings were also being generated from Ballarat (Victoria), would have awarded substantially more for my financial business losses than the arbitrator did. The fact that the government authority has admitted in writing to a massive problem lasting at least two years, for which I have yet to be compensated, only strengthens my story.
A 3-minute YouTube video featuring my story against the beautiful backdrop of "Lake Wendouree Ballarat."
This is a never-ending saga.
A letter dated 6 April 1993, from Cathy Lindsey, Coordinator of the Haddon & District Community House Ballarat (Victoria) to the Editor of Melbourne’s Herald-Sun newspaper, read:
“I am writing in reference to your article in last Friday’s Herald-Sun (2nd April 1993) about phone difficulties experienced by businesses.
I wish to confirm that I have had problems trying to contact Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp over the past 2 years.
I also experienced problems while trying to organise our family camp for September this year. On numerous occasions I have rung from both this business number 053 424 675 and also my home number and received no response – a dead line.
I rang around the end of February (1993) and twice was subjected to a piercing noise similar to a fax. I reported this incident to Telstra who got the same noise when testing.” Evidence File 10 B
The challenges I faced during the arbitration in 1994 were substantial. Telstra not only made threats but acted upon them, which significantly disadvantaged my claim. These threats are well-documented in Senate Hansard's records (Senate Evidence File No 31). As the years passed without resolution to ongoing telephone problems, I had no choice but to sell my beloved holiday camp in December 2001 to Darren and Jenny Lewis for land value only. Within a year of taking over, Darren Lewis started to receive threats from Melbourne's Telstra technicians via telephone from Melbourne, an exercise that Telstra had done throughout the COT Cases arbitrations and had been using for years. Chapter 4 The New Owners Tell Their Story
Never showing their face when making those threats but not concealing their names. It's thuggery at its worst.
The sale agreement could hardly reflect any goodwill. Multiple law firms and real estate agents in Portland knew the issues that had not been fixed during my arbitration. I found it difficult to convey a thriving business to the Lewises, especially with the local Portland Observer regularly reporting the Australian Federal Police's investigation into Telstra's illegal interception of my telephone conversations and the potential interception of my faxes. Media coverage in the Herald Sun newspaper (owned by Rupert Murdoch) also highlighted the involvement of former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser and a near-death experience of a child from the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne who had stayed at the camp.
The Herald Sun newspaper strongly emphasized that the nurses faced significant challenges when attempting to make calls from the camp, encountering numerous issues with the phone services. It's important to note that mobile phones were not usable at Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp until 2004, a decade after the reported difficulties.
This prompted Rupert Murdoch's sister, Helen Handury, to visit and offer her assistance. Helen's significant contributions are well-documented in Rupert Murdoch - Hacked Documents.
Children's lives could be at risk
Comments made from the Herald Sun newspaper dated 30 August 1993, confirm just how damaging some of these newspaper articles were to my already ailing business with statements like:
“The Royal Children’s Hospital has told a holiday camp operators in Portland that it cannot send chronically ill children there because of Telecom’s poor phone service. The hospital has banned trips after fears that the children’s lives could be at risk in a medical emergency if the telephone service to the Portland camp continued to malfunction”.
The centre’s stand follows letters from schools, community groups, companies and individuals who have complained about the phone service at Portland’s Cape Bridgewater Holiday camp.”
Youths from the Royal Children’s Centre for Adolescent Health, who were suffering from “chronic illnesses”, visited the camp earlier this year.
Group leader Ms Louise Rolls said in a letter to the camp the faulty phones had endangered lives and the hospital would not return to the camp unless the phone service could be guaranteed” Arbitrator File No/90
After the Melbourne Children's Hospital recorded a near-death experience with me having to rush a sick child with cancer to the Portland Hospital 18 kilometres away from my holiday camp, Telstra finally decided to take my telephone faults seriously. None of the 35 children (all with cancer-related illnesses) had mobile phones, or the six or so nurses and carers. Mobile telephones could not operate successfully in Cape Bridgewater until 2004, eleven years after this event. My coin-operated gold phone was also plagued with phone problems, and it took several tries to ring out of the holiday camp. An ambulance arrived once we could ring through to the Hospital.
How could I really sell the holiday camp as a thriving business? I advised the Australian Federal Police I firmly believed that once I stepped down from managing the holiday camp, Telstra would take immediate action to address any issues. True enough, shortly after my departure, Telstra revamped the business operations, leading to a substantial increase in incoming calls, as verified by Darren Lewis. Nevertheless, intermittent problems persisted, as evidenced in the following document.
Telstra also made severe threats against the new owners, who purchased the company seven years after the arbitrator allowed Telstra not to address my ongoing telephone problems. The threats made and carried out by Telstra during my arbitration are recorded in the Senate Hansard. The threats made by Telstra to Darren and Jenny Lewis, the new owners of the holiday camp, are documented with the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman. (Home-Page File No/76 and D-Lewis File 1-I)
I want to emphasize that the arbitrator only awarded compensation for past telephone faults, not for those still affecting my business. Even though the arbitrator was provided with written evidence from several COT Cases showing that the Ericsson AXE telephone exchange equipment under investigation during the COT arbitrations had been removed or was in the process of being removed from telephone exchanges around the globe, the arbitrator still would not make a finding on this Ericsson equipment.
The situation resulted in the closure of businesses unable to withstand these persistent billing issues, ultimately impacting the livelihoods of numerous small business owners. Some individuals faced tragic consequences like suicide and marital breakdowns due to the financial strain. Additionally, Telstra pursued legal action against Australian citizens for unpaid disputed billing accounts despite being fully aware of the systemic software problem in their accounting system.
Two Alan Smiths (not related) living in Cape Bridgewater.
The Ericsson AXE billing problems continued
I formally addressed the possibility that another Australian citizen, Alan Smith, residing in the Discovery Bay area of Cape Bridgewater, might have received my arbitration correspondence. This circumstance made me suspect that my lack of arbitration-related communication may have originated from this source. Regrettably, no inquiry was pursued on this essential matter. Furthermore, I duly informed the arbitrator and arbitration administrator of the intimidations I faced from the legal representatives of Telstra, specifically Freehill Hollingdale & Page, leading up to and during the arbitration process. I also underscored that the aforementioned individual, who shares the same name and resides in Cape Bridgewater, had encountered similar intimidations from Telstra’s legal representatives, who were presently representing Telstra in my arbitration. Despite these disclosures, no subsequent investigation into these intimidations ensued. Moreover, despite the acknowledgement of these matters by a Senate Committee, no proactive measures were undertaken to aid my situation by the arbitrators, Dr Gordon Hughes and Warwick Smith, to stop these threats from being carried out. Commonwealth Ombudsman records show these threats were duly carried out.
I presented Alan Smith's billing information, obtained through the FOI, to the arbitrator as evidence of the threats he received from Telstra and their lawyers. In my experience, Alan contested the billing accounts for calls he did not make. Regrettably, there has been no response from Dr. Gordon Hughes (the arbitrator) or Warwick Smith (the administrator).
Chapter 14 - Was it Legal or Illegal? it is revealed that on 16 October 1995, five months subsequent to the finalization of my arbitration process, AUSTEL/ACMA authorized Telstra's original arbitration defence liaison officer, Steve Black, to address the most critical components of my ongoing 1800 Ericsson AXE billing claim documents in confidence (Open letter File No/46-A to 46-l), without the presence of the arbitrator or myself. Consequently, my legal entitlement to contest Telstra's billing submission was abrogated.
BCI and SVT reports - Section One
Who highjacked the BCI and SVT Reports
The following Federal Magistrates Court letter dated 3 December 2008, from Darren Lewis, was never discussed by the government or Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman or its relevance to several arbitration documents in 1994 to 1995 being highjacked, i.e., never arriving at the Magistrates Court.
My letter to the Hon David Hawker MP (see File 274 - AS-CAV Exhibit 282 to 323) clearly indicates that even the Portland Australia Post office staff know that the security of specific mail leaving the Portland Post Office cannot be given the green light. So what was the use of me road mailing my arbitration documents to the arbitrator in 1994 and 1995 and the new owners of my business sending similar Telstra-related documents to the Federal Magistrate Court when there was a big chance the mail would not arrive? Darren and Jenny Lewis (the new owners of my business letter of 3 December 2008, is just further alarming information that the government has not transparently investigated (see the following statement by Darren Lewis to the Federal Magistrates Court:
“I was advised by Ms McCormick that the Federal Magistrates Court had only received on 5th December 2008 an affidavit prepared by Alan Smith dated 2 December 2008. PLEASE NOTE: I originally enclosed with Alan Smith’s affidavit in the (envelope) overnight mail the following documents:
- Two 29 page transparent s/comb bound report titled SVT & BCI – Federal Magistrates Court File No (P) MLG1229/2008 prepared by Alan Smith in support of my claims that I had inherited the ongoing telephone problems and faults when I purchased the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp
- Two s/comb transparent bound documents titled Exhibits 1 to 34
- Two s/comb transparent bound documents titled Exhibits 35 to 71 (the attached 71 Exhibits was enclosed in support of Alan Smith’s 29 page report);
- Three CD Disks which incorporated all of the submitted material.
“On learning from Ms McCormick that the information discussed above in points 1 to 4 had not been received by the Federal Magistrates Court I again had a stress attack seizure, a problem I have been suffering with for quite some time due to the predicament I now find myself in and the disbelief that once again my mail has been intercepted. I have attached herewith dated 3rd December 2008, a copy of the Australia Post overnight mail receipt docket numbers SV0750627 and SV0750626 confirming the total cost to send the above aforementioned information was $21.80. I am sure Australia Post would confirm that a large amount of documents would have been enclosed in these two envelopes when they left Portland.” My Story Evidence File 12-A to 12-B
Australia Post will not charge any postage fee for an overnight parcel unless they stamp and retain it. Since neither of these parcels arrived at their proper destination with all the information enclosed initially, those documents must have been ‘lost’ between the Portland Post Office and the Magistrates Court.
As I have reported throughout this webpage, numerous Telstra COT-related arbitration documents (like those lost on route to the Federal Magistrates Court in December 2008) were also lost during 1994/95 on route to the arbitrator hearing my case.
As Darren’s letter shows, I helped him prepare his bankruptcy appeal against the Australian Taxation Office (for back taxes) using my own evidence that the Telstra Corporation knowingly submitted two false and fundamentally flawed Cape Bridgewater reports to the arbitrator during my arbitration to deliberately mislead the arbitrator into believing that there were no more ongoing phone problems affecting my business.
Lost in transit
Bankrupt in 2009
Receivers walked Darren Lewis off the property and went bankrupt in August 2008.
After viewing the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp (SVT) CCAS data dated 29 September 1994 (see Arbitrator File No/110), Brian Hodge (B Tech, MBA, B.C. Telecommunications), on 27 July 2007, prepared a report. On page 22, he states:
“It is my opinion that the reports submitted to Austel on this testing program was [sic] flawed, erroneous, fictitious, fraudulent & fabricated, as it is clear that no such testing has taken place as Telstra’s own call charge system DOES NOT record any such activities. Therefore the results are flawed or did not occur.” (Main Evidence File No 3)
Brian Hodges concluded that two Telstra Cape Bridgewater BCI and SVT reports were fabricated. Copies of the same material I attached to the (same) two reports were stolen before they reached the Magistrates Court. The same technical information that I was showing the Magistrates Court proved not only did my telephone problems continue for seven years after the conclusion of my 1994/95 arbitration, but they continued to affect the holiday camp as late as November 2006, five years after I sold the business to Darren and Jenny Lewis.
The illusive logbook (example 1)
Telstra's Principal Investigator could not access the Portland/Cape Bridgewater logbook.
Mr Direen has been brave enough to reveal that, in 1999 / 2000, after he left Telstra, he assisted the Victoria Police Major Fraud Group with their investigations into the COT fraud allegations. The Major Fraud Group also seconded me as a witness in that same investigation (see page 11 → Major Fraud Group Transcript (2)).
Sworn Witness Statement dated 10/08/2006
In Mr Direen's sworn witness statement, he notes:
Point 20: - "Finally, I would like to say this while I was working at Telstra and it would have been the early nineties I had cause to travel ro Portland in western Victoria in relation to a complaint involving suspected illegal interference to telephone lines at the Portland exchange."
Point 21: - “As part of my investigation, I first attended at the exchange to speak to staff and check the exchange log book which was a record of all visitors to the exchange and a record of work conducted by the technical officers.”
Point 22: - “When I attended at the exchange, I found that the log book was missing and could not be located. I was informed at the time by local staff that a customer from the Cape Bridgewater are south of Portland was also complaining about his phone service and that the log book could have been removed as part of that investigation. I was not told about this complaint prior to travelling to Portland and when I made inquiries by telephone back to Melbourne I was told not to get involved and that it was being handled by another area of Telstra. I later found out that the Cape Bridgewater complainant was a part of the COT cases”.
AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings, dated March 1994, confirms that between Points 2 to 212, the government public servants who used extracts from the Portland and Cape Bridgewater logbooks when investigating my ongoing telephone problems found my claims against Telstra validated. One does not have to be a genius to understand that had the arbitrator been provided Telstra's logbook, his award on my financial business losses would have been substantially higher than he awarded. Living with these types of injustices has taken its toll on all COT Cases and their immediate family.
